Illinois Ranks 48th In Job-gain Study

A new study of employment gains ranks Illinois in 48th place nationally in 1985, placing it ahead of only Oklahoma and Louisiana, two of the states hit hardest by declining oil prices.

Among Midwestern states, the study ranks Illinois last, with a net loss of 1,700 jobs in 1985, while the 10 other states in the region registered clear gains ranging from 5,400 new jobs in Nebraska to 155,800 in Ohio.

Michigan and Ohio, which suffered severe job losses during 1980-1984, now rank in the top 9 states nationally in job growth, according to the study. Ohio`s gain was surpassed only by California, New York and Florida. Part of the gains in Michigan and Ohio can be attributed to the revitalization of industries--such as the auto industry--that were depressed in recent years.

The study, which is based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics computer records and excludes agricultural workers and the self-employed, was commissioned by the Research Committee on National Urban Policy. It was conducted by professor John D. Kasarda, chairman of the University of North Carolina`s sociology department. Kasarda, who announced his findings at a job growth conference in New York Thursday, described them as ``preliminary.``

He cautioned against concluding that the Illinois economy is in decline. His analysis of the state`s employment figures for 1984-1986 shows it had a gain of 141,600 jobs, a clear reversal of the 1980 to 1984 period, when he said 206,800 jobs were lost. The state`s unemployment rate for April was 8.2 percent, down from 9 percent in November, 1985.

The Illinois figures, like those for the other states, reflect the huge, still ongoing shift in the nation`s economy from manufacturing to service-dominated industries, and the heated competition by state officials for new industry and business.

Kasarda`s findings indicate that job gains in the Midwestern ``rust belt`` are catching up to the Northeast, which surged ahead of the central region in the first two years of the 1980s. Overall employment increases in the Northeast for 1984-1986 were 5.8 percent, while the Midwest`s figure during that period was 5.5 percent, according to Kasarda.

The study raises the question among some Illinois analysts, however, as to why the state apparently remains so far behind other Midwestern states, despite what is regarded by many as an aggressive economic development program and a relatively robust job growth environment in the greater Chicago area. A new study by the National Planning Association projected that by the year 2,000, Chicago would rank eighth among 30 leading metropolitan areas nationally in the generation of new jobs.

``My own feeling is that the state is growing. What bothers me is we apparently are not growing as fast as everyone else,`` said Louis Masotti, professor of management and urban affairs at Northwestern University.

Jay Hedges, director of the state`s Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, said Kasarda`s study does not reflect the state`s efforts to attract new business to replace the heavy losses in manufacturing.

``In the long haul we are in a definite upswing. Many of those jobs that have been committed to won`t be coming on line for another two years, such as those at the Diamond Star Mitsubishi-Chrysler plant,`` Hedges said.

David Merkowitz, a spokesman for the Northeast-Midwest Congressional Coalition, attributes Illinois` bottom-of-the-list position to the state`s demographics. Unlike Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and other Midwestern states, Illinois, dominated by one metropolis, does not have a number of major cities. And it is in cities where the growth in the service sector in generated.

Illinois` loss of jobs in the manufacturing sector, mainly in steel, rubber, auto, farm and heavy equipment plants, have not been replaced as fully by service jobs as in other states, Merkowitz said.

Kasarda and Merkowitz both speculated that Illinois` poor showing was likely boosted by spin-off effects on business and industry operating in areas hit by declines in the state`s agricultural economy.